On Mon, Apr 09, 2001 at 05:55:13PM -0500, Mike Meyer wrote:
> Jordan Hubbard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> types:
> > > Just because the problem is difficult to solve does not mean it can not be
> > > or should not be solved.
> > Fine, how about you solve it and the rest of us will get back to all
> > the other stuff we have on our plates. :)
>
> I know, you're kidding.
He's almost certainly not. FreeBSD is a huge time sink, and people work
on whatever interests them. If this topic interests you then you're the
best person to work on it, and submit changes.
> But if some group of people who have to deal
> with the questions propose a complete new naming scheme designed to
> deal with all the problems we see the current ones causing (though the
> only serious one is -BETA/-RC), is there any chance of it being
> adopted?
There's certainly a chance.
> How about just a new name for either -BETA (the major source
> of the problem), or simply calling -STABLE -ALPHA, thus making -BETA &
> -RC seem desirable?
Because -STABLE is not alpha code, by any definition of "Alpha" that I'm
familiar with. -STABLE is designed to be exactly that, "Stable code
that is probably suitable to run your production systems on, with as few
surprises as possible".
N
--
FreeBSD: The Power to Serve http://www.freebsd.org/
FreeBSD Documentation Project http://www.freebsd.org/docproj/
--- 15B8 3FFC DDB4 34B0 AA5F 94B7 93A8 0764 2C37 E375 ---
PGP signature
